Ross Has Heavy Hand Online

Thursday

Jan 24, 2013 at 12:41 AM

Re: "Ross: Spending Cuts Needed to Reduce Deficit," Jan. 2. Your article begins with this paraphrase: "Rep. Dennis Ross would have voted against legislation to stop from going over the fiscal cliff even if it meant going over it."

Re: "Ross: Spending Cuts Needed to Reduce Deficit," Jan. 2. Your article begins with this paraphrase: "Rep. Dennis Ross would have voted against legislation to stop from going over the fiscal cliff even if it meant going over it."

Although I agree with his fiscal-cliff no vote, this time, here is a canard: Because he voted yes on four of six pork-laden appropriation bills in his tenure, Ross is not conservative. Appropriation bills are huge and dwarf all other spending.

However, when I tried to express my views on this and other political matters on his Facebook page, he deleted all my comments and blocked me from posting.

Were this his personal Facebook page or Twitter feed, this would be immoral, but not illegal. However, so long as I don't threaten, harass or use vulgar language, I have a right to post on his public page, distinct from a private or personal page. He's violating free-speech rights and, by extension, First Amendment rights of redress.

Most readers know that, while I have strong opinions, I've never gotten banned from The Ledger's forums, so I'm clearly not a troublemaker.

Furthermore, if it were "just Gordon" complaining, you might give Ross the benefit of the doubt.

However, many people are making complaints that Ross unjustly blocked them from these social networks.

If Ross is not justified in this, then why is he doing it? To silence those who disagree with legislative requests of rich campaign contributors?